Message-ID: <3b7f2bdd-77ed-00d7-437c-dd9c37e6a2fa@enterprisedb.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2021 14:58:06 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.3.2
Subject: Re: PublicationActions - use bit flags.
Content-Language: en-US
To: Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com>,
 PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
References: 
 <CAHut+Pt2hjRJxfuF9_GUcBVg=nhk3G+WNsNkPtP2d+4CF4e4Pg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAHut+Pt2hjRJxfuF9_GUcBVg=nhk3G+WNsNkPtP2d+4CF4e4Pg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/3b7f2bdd-77ed-00d7-437c-dd9c37e6a2fa%40enterprisedb.com>
Precedence: bulk

On 20.12.21 01:18, Peter Smith wrote:
> For some reason the current HEAD PublicationActions is a struct of
> boolean representing combinations of the 4 different "publication
> actions".
> 
> I felt it is more natural to implement boolean flag combinations using
> a bitmask instead of a struct of bools. IMO using the bitmask also
> simplifies assignment and checking of said flags.

I don't see why this is better.  It just makes the code longer and adds 
more punctuation and reduces type safety.